General Discussion

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)

129. wow, thanks for your take on what is not "real racism", LOL. you should share that with the AA

Mon Feb 17, 2014, 05:32 PM

Feb 2014

community here. I am sure they would appreciate it. And enough of the BS that they were splitting hairs over murder 1 or 2. We know better than that from the fact that they were considering it self defense to fire on an entire group of people fleeing. Whoever tried to push forth self defense on all counts- who ever made up that rationale for attempted murder (as it was not put forth by the lawyers), is a deeply troubled individual. That much we can judge.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

141 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

That jury denied justice to Jordan Davis and his family. Be real. [View all] geek tragedy Feb 2014 OP

They did not convict him of MURDERING Jordan Davis, elleng Feb 2014 #1

They did not convict him at all for his conduct towards Davis. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #2

due to particular charge against him elleng Feb 2014 #3

He was convicted on four counts. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #4

NOT on whether 'he did anything wrong' re: Davis, elleng Feb 2014 #8

Well, yeah when you murder someone that's what the charge is. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #10

You don't know that. sked14 Feb 2014 #27

no- from the jury question on self defense- at least one juror was trying to let him off for ALL bettyellen Feb 2014 #60

That makes no sense mythology Feb 2014 #59

here's how it worked: geek tragedy Feb 2014 #62

and until the judge clarified, the idiot juror hoped spraying bullets at four fleeing people could bettyellen Feb 2014 #65

yep. nt geek tragedy Feb 2014 #74

It does- the juror likely talked his way into a corner, insisting it was self defense..... bettyellen Feb 2014 #63

True, but they failed to see it as murder, which is a real crime imo. Rex Feb 2014 #104

I'm troubled demwing Feb 2014 #7

Because if he had stopped shooting after he murdered Jordan Davis, there geek tragedy Feb 2014 #9

Maybe, but is it logical demwing Feb 2014 #12

racism is more insidious than that. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #13

"almost literally impossible to acquit him" Why? demwing Feb 2014 #25

because fleeing in a car you are shooting at is not an agressive act. and it's pretty hard to bettyellen Feb 2014 #68

You were right, I apologize demwing Feb 2014 #136

Ugh sad - two, then three for self defense? Wow. bettyellen Feb 2014 #139

You were right, I apologize demwing Feb 2014 #137

Best to you, thanks. nt geek tragedy Feb 2014 #138

That is highly unlikely to be true. whopis01 Feb 2014 #31

Bliows you mind doesn't it that some think that it just HAD to be a racist sked14 Feb 2014 #34

Yeah - it does. And it is a bad path to start going down. whopis01 Feb 2014 #41

no, you have to be able to discuss racism openly and that does not, in any way make you go bettyellen Feb 2014 #82

one person gave him benefit of the doubt for "self defense" and tried to give him same for shooting bettyellen Feb 2014 #72

Well we will see. n/t whopis01 Feb 2014 #93

I already saw them ask the question, there is no walking it back that someone on that jury bought bettyellen Feb 2014 #95

Until we hear directly from the jury, sked14 Feb 2014 #112

not speculation that the jury discussed self defense for all of the charges- it's part of the record bettyellen Feb 2014 #113

They asked about it, but you have no idea in what context. sked14 Feb 2014 #114

so, you think they asked about it because no one wanted to consider it? Lol...okay then. bettyellen Feb 2014 #115

Exactly the same thing you're doing, speculating, sked14 Feb 2014 #117

that they asked to consider self defense is a fact- it's one of the few things we know they bettyellen Feb 2014 #118

Once again, you don't know in what context sked14 Feb 2014 #119

the context was their deliberation- the last question they asked before reaching a verdict. bettyellen Feb 2014 #120

Oh gosh look- the jury was going for self defense bettyellen Feb 2014 #140

think of it this way: geek tragedy Feb 2014 #87

You have no way to prove AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #86

the current template? one juror wanted to let him off with self defense. end of story. bettyellen Feb 2014 #100

And there was a ton of other AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #103

I think it was the juror who went for self defense- defying all known facts- that we are talking bettyellen Feb 2014 #109

You are engaging in complete speculation AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #123

the fact is- they asked the jury about "self defense" applying to ALL the charges. that is on record bettyellen Feb 2014 #125

any excuse for killing a black kid noiretextatique Mar 2014 #141

In fairness there is a bit of history in Florida el_bryanto Feb 2014 #39

You're right. I can't add anything. /nt demwing Feb 2014 #49

+10000 noiretextatique Feb 2014 #84

They didn't acquit either. This is not hard to understand. morningfog Feb 2014 #52

yes, they had nothing meaningful to say about his actions towards Davis nt geek tragedy Feb 2014 #53

It is not their job to say anything. morningfog Feb 2014 #55

"most likely" geek tragedy Feb 2014 #58

That's not quite right, the state has charged Michael Dunn with 1st degree murder. Fla Dem Feb 2014 #122

This is false , there's no "wait" for premeditated murder... Could be seconds and that uponit7771 Feb 2014 #5

You know what the instructions to the jury were? elleng Feb 2014 #11

He will be retried and I hope for the finality of justice ... arthritisR_US Feb 2014 #6

I think it is possible that this jury was reluctant Jenoch Feb 2014 #14

that is not a permissible consideration for a jury. their job is to determine guilt. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #15

You WANT there to be a racist juror demwing Feb 2014 #26

and the way you WANT there NOT to be a racist juror heaven05 Feb 2014 #30

Do you believe in the death penalty? demwing Feb 2014 #35

vengeance is NOT a bad thing sometimes heaven05 Feb 2014 #38

This is where we disagree demwing Feb 2014 #48

No, but I would prefer self defense require an agressive act- and not some ridiculous fear bettyellen Feb 2014 #121

The state said it would not seek the death penalty, elleng Feb 2014 #17

I had read the jury had the option to convice on lesser charges? Scootaloo Feb 2014 #22

Yes they did. whopis01 Feb 2014 #33

Oh that's it. I'm sure Scootaloo Feb 2014 #21

I said I thought it was 'possible'. Jenoch Feb 2014 #24

Agreed Ohio Joe Feb 2014 #16

Truth. JoeyT Feb 2014 #18

Hung On Even Lesser Charges SoCalMusicLover Feb 2014 #19

I'm glad they didn't convict on the lesser charges. missingthebigdog Feb 2014 #28

Not true. sked14 Feb 2014 #32

But that doesn't make sense Diamonique Feb 2014 #36

If one or more were holding out for acquittal, sked14 Feb 2014 #37

the court said they couldn't consider it self defense for ALL of the shootings- just the one. bettyellen Feb 2014 #75

I think some folks don't wish to or are too emotionally vested to process that as even plausible. TheKentuckian Feb 2014 #40

The Florida prosecutors support Stand Your Ground Murder of black on white-ish. IAmKirak Feb 2014 #20

+ 1 SYG Laws are a free pass for whites to kill non whites wocaonimabi Feb 2014 #23

Sad, but true. IAmKirak Feb 2014 #91

True. n/t Whisp Feb 2014 #29

While I agree there was no alsame Feb 2014 #42

How do you know that it wasn't one or two jurors that were holding out sked14 Feb 2014 #44

That's true. But I think if there was alsame Feb 2014 #47

We have a dead person but only attempted murder. jwirr Feb 2014 #43

So far. sked14 Feb 2014 #45

Good. jwirr Feb 2014 #46

I agree. nt cinnabonbon Feb 2014 #50

Dumbest post yet. morningfog Feb 2014 #51

where did you read that the only matter of dispute was between 2nd and 1st degree murder geek tragedy Feb 2014 #54

And where did you read otherwise? demwing Feb 2014 #56

It is obvious. morningfog Feb 2014 #57

No, one of the jurors was in favor of letting him off on grounds of self defense. bettyellen Feb 2014 #76

I believe you owe a retraction. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #135

"Legally, there has been no finding that Dunn did anything wrong by killing Jordan Davis" demwing Feb 2014 #61

it was obvious Dunn committed a criminal homicide. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #64

Unable to agree on the level of criminal liability. morningfog Feb 2014 #66

basis for that conclusion? nt geek tragedy Feb 2014 #73

Hung jury. morningfog Feb 2014 #81

Which is why they're re-trying the case... Hippo_Tron Feb 2014 #67

I'm sorry, you were Juror #...? demwing Feb 2014 #70

logical inference based on their three questions from earlier that morning geek tragedy Feb 2014 #77

The questions were.. Sassysdad Feb 2014 #90

all it takes is one bad juror to thwart justice nt geek tragedy Feb 2014 #92

One bad juror? Sassysdad Feb 2014 #99

why, because they charged him with the offense he committed? geek tragedy Feb 2014 #101

I'm doing no such thing... Sassysdad Feb 2014 #107

did you miss the jury questions on Saturday about self defense? Or just unable to understand what bettyellen Feb 2014 #79

Why? Beacool Feb 2014 #69

they couldn't agree that he committed a crime against Jordan Davis. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #78

Maybe it's because they charged him with first degree murder. Beacool Feb 2014 #80

Ok? AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #85

yes. when they saw that a drunk, angry racist gun nut is maybe justified in emptying geek tragedy Feb 2014 #88

So racist dimwits AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #105

you have a rather shallow understanding of racism and a mistaken one on reasonable doubt geek tragedy Feb 2014 #106

And I will judge AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #124

that you think it would be justice that he get away with murdering Jordan Davis says everything geek tragedy Feb 2014 #130

someone saw self defense- they said so to the judge. they saw self defense in ALL of it. bettyellen Feb 2014 #126

The wild speculation is that it is racism AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #128

wow, thanks for your take on what is not "real racism", LOL. you should share that with the AA bettyellen Feb 2014 #129

Alternate headline: AnalystInParadise Feb 2014 #71

Thank you... have seen too many apologist positions on DU JCMach1 Feb 2014 #83

Prison is prison... Lost_Count Feb 2014 #89

How do they find him guilty of attempted murder and not murder? Renew Deal Feb 2014 #94

Two separate fusillades of bullets from him. geek tragedy Feb 2014 #96

They bought the self defense argument? Renew Deal Feb 2014 #98

at least one did in all likelihood. jury questions from yesterday were all about geek tragedy Feb 2014 #102

not sure why that didn't sink in, it was obvious someone was pushing for aquittal of all counts at bettyellen Feb 2014 #116

Agreed Boom Sound 416 Feb 2014 #97

The jury probably couldn't decide between Murder 1 and Murder 2 bobclark86 Feb 2014 #108

um, no, the prosecution wasn't going to seek the death penalty geek tragedy Feb 2014 #111

give it time. they will. spanone Feb 2014 #110

Hopefully A Juror Will Come Forward SoCalMusicLover Feb 2014 #127

What about a wrongful death suit? OJ Simpson was found guilty in a civil trial and paid millions. alp227 Feb 2014 #131

This concerns me savalez Feb 2014 #132

defendant would doubtlessly appeal consecutive sentences nt geek tragedy Feb 2014 #133

Wouldn't they have to go to appeals court first? Diamonique Feb 2014 #134